Back
Dismisses Writ Seeking $2.5 Million from eBay for
Bengaluru, – The has refused to entertain a filed by a retired Army officer, Lt. Col. D.K. Havanoor (Retd.), seeking USD 2.5 million in from eBay entities for alleged . Justice M.G.S. Kamal, presiding over the matter, disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner to pursue his grievance before a competent civil court.
The Petition: A Grievance of
Lt. Col. Havanoor approached the High Court under , claiming that his copyright over a book had been infringed by and its related Indian entities. According to the petition, the book in question was displayed and sold on eBay's platform for USD 12.53. The petitioner also stated that he had previously filed complaints with the in Bengaluru, one of which was registered as Crime No. 366 of .
In , the petitioner issued a legal notice demanding USD 2.5 million in for the alleged violation of his . The petition sought to recover this amount from respondents No. 3 to 9, which included , , , , and three individuals associated with these companies.
The Court’s Observation on
The court noted that the core grievance was an alleged . It observed that a seeking payment of from is not maintainable. The order states:
“ seeking direction to respondent Nos. 3 to 9, who are the to pay said of 2,500,000 (2.5 million US dollars) cannot be entertained.”
The court also recorded the submission of counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (the and the ) that these authorities had “no role of any nature whatsoever in the ” and had been “misjoined as parties to the petition.”
to Approach Competent Forum
Given that the relief sought was essentially a civil claim for against private entities, the High Court declined to exercise its . It disposed of the petition without adjudicating on the merits of the copyright claim, but expressly reserved the petitioner's right to seek redress before a .
“In view of the above, the petition is disposed of reserving to the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievance before a , if so, advised.”
Key Observations of the Court
- Nature of Grievance: “Suffice to state that the grievance of the petitioner is alleged infringement of his purported copyrights.”
- of Writ: The court held that a seeking a direction to to pay cannot be entertained.
- : The and the were found to have no involvement in the .
Implications
The judgment reinforces the principle that claims for based on alleged against fall outside the scope of under . Affected parties are expected to pursue such claims before civil courts or other appropriate forums. The decision does not preclude Lt. Col. Havanoor from filing a fresh civil suit, but the High Court has made it clear that it cannot be the venue for such a plea.
